Abstractobjective Firstly, to map out and compare all-cause and cause-specific mortality patterns by migrant background in Belgium; and secondly, to probe into explanations for the observed patterns, more specifically into the healthy-migrant, acculturation and the migration-as-rapid-health-transition theories.methods Data comprise individually linked Belgian census-mortality follow-up data for the period 2001-2011. All official inhabitants aged 25-54 at time of the census were included. To delve into the different explanations, differences in all-cause and chronic-and infectious-disease mortality were estimated using Poisson regression models, adjusted for age, socioeconomic position and urbanicity.results First-generation immigrants have lower all-cause and chronic-disease mortality than the host population. This mortality advantage wears off with length of stay and is more marked among non-Western than Western first-generation immigrants. For example, Western and non-Western male immigrants residing 10 years or more in Belgium have a mortality rate ratio for cardiovascular disease of 0.72 (95% CI 0.66-0.78) and 0.59 (95% CI 0.53-0.66), respectively (vs host population). The pattern of infectious-disease mortality in migrants is slightly different, with rather high mortality rates in first-generation sub-Saharan Africans and rather low rates in all other immigrant groups. As for second-generation immigrants, the picture is gloomier, with a mortality disadvantage that disappears after control for socioeconomic position.conclusion Findings are largely consistent with the healthy-migrant, acculturation and the migration-as-rapid-health-transition theories. The convergence of the mortality profile of secondgeneration immigrants towards that of the host population with similar socioeconomic position indicates the need for policies simultaneously addressing different areas of deprivation.
Being a highly industrialized country with one of the highest male lung cancer mortality rates in Europe, Belgium is an interesting study area for lung cancer research. This study investigates geographical patterns in lung cancer mortality in Belgium. More specifically it probes into the contribution of individual as well as area-level characteristics to (sub-district patterns in) lung cancer mortality. Data from the 2001 census linked to register data from 2001–2011 are used, selecting all Belgian inhabitants aged 65+ at time of the census. Individual characteristics include education, housing status and home ownership. Urbanicity, unemployment rate, the percentage employed in mining and the percentage employed in other high-risk industries are included as sub-district characteristics. Regional variation in lung cancer mortality at sub-district level is estimated using directly age-standardized mortality rates. The association between lung cancer mortality and individual and area characteristics, and their impact on the variation of sub-district level is estimated using multilevel Poisson models. Significant sub-district variations in lung cancer mortality are observed. Individual characteristics explain a small share of this variation, while a large share is explained by sub-district characteristics. Individuals with a low socioeconomic status experience a higher lung cancer mortality risk. Among women, an association with lung cancer mortality is found for the sub-district characteristics urbanicity and unemployment rate, while for men lung cancer mortality was associated with the percentage employed in mining. Not just individual characteristics, but also area characteristics are thus important determinants of (regional differences in) lung cancer mortality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.